Why do Atheists tend to bash Christianity but give excuses for Islam??

I think it is obvious that Christianity has become mostly benign and secularized for the most part and I don't see Christians subjugating their women and executing gays in the ways that take place in the Islamic world due to the quran and Hadith (the Hadith is the so-called writings of the prophet and his followers in which Islamic Shariah law is based from); but I see too many atheists tending to bash Christianity and giving excuses for Islam. Why is this so when according to the Islamic faith, we atheists are "kafar" should be the first ones killed before the Christians and Jews (especially me, since I am an apostate since I was "born" a Muslim); therefore, why do atheists tend to give excuses for the true evils of the Islamic faith??

Jesus Christ as a symbol (whether he was a real person or not) is a much better role model than the child molesting, murderous, and evil "prophet" called Muhammad. The Bible doesn't demand governments to be Christian but the Quran demands that all governments be Islamic by nature and the punishments are much more bizarre. In Islam, you can not even ask any questions about Muhammad or Allah but Christians and Jews are able to debate within themselves and ask questions. When a cartoon is drawn or a quran is burnt you see how savagely Muslims act throughout the world and those who are "moderate" instead of condemning the barbaric acts blame the "Salman Rushdie's" or the "Pastor" instead of placing blame on the perpetrators and culture of violence in the Islamic world. So why is it, that Christianity is often (in my opinion) overly criticized and Islam is not criticized enough when the gravest threat to the existence of the human race is surely an Islamic regime with nuclear weapons?? I'd like to get your opinions..

I think the reason most atheists focus more on christianity is because christianity is what most atheists (on public forums, anyway) are facing on a day-to-day basis and what is threatening their personal lives.

For instance, as an American, the religious right threatens reproductive rights, education, science funding, civil rights (women; homosexuals), etc. Just look at the changes made to Texas textbooks, if you want to be a little queasy! Muslims don't really affect me that much, personally. That is not to say that I support Islam, and I certainly speak against these archaic and disturbing attributes.

I think some atheists may also be afraid to speak up as much on Islam because they really don't understand it, as much, and so they don't want to seem offensive by knowing less about the topic. So read up, everyone!

Let me begin by stating that I changed my way of addressing all religions as superstitions. I found that to call folks Christians or Muslims or Hindu only lent creedence to their belief they were all different from each other in their delusions. Using the term "superstition" when I address one of the groups lets them know right off the bat I think they are all the same. A Christian doesn't believe they are superstitious but does belive the Hindus ARE! And this is true in vise-versa. But they know your lumping them all together when you remove the individual moniker.

But in direct answer to your question I think most atheist go after Christians because it is the most personal with each of us. Here in the USofA we are way more likely to be subject to the jerks of Jesus than the maniacs of Muhammed. We tend to go with what we know. That is different with the Jesus cult. They are much more prone to rip on the Islamic aherents for the simple fact they DON"T know any personally.

I do not know any fellow atheist that support any superstition over the other. Our exposure to them usually drives who we contend with. But I very much agree that, at this point. the followers of Muhammed are by far the leading lunatics among the superstitious for the last 10 years for sure.

I agree with you my brush stroke was broad. I intended to only include those Muslims who believe that women should be subject to a man, the ones that feel children should be brainwashed into Islam and taught only to read and write so that they can understand the Koran. Only the Muslims that preach and believe that homosexuals should be killed. Only the Muslims that ahere to subjugating the rest of the world to Islam by any means possible. Only those Muslims that believe that to draw pictures of Mohammed should be killed.

Sure, there are Christians, Hindu, etc that all practice their particular forms of these listed (and more) atrocities. But at this point in time the vast majority of the practitioners are Muslim.

There's a difference between calling Islam a religion of lunacy and calling all Muslims lunatics. For the same reason I still wore condoms while calling myself Catholic, Muslims will ignore tenets of mainstream Islam and still call themselves Muslim, but that does not mean that jihad and oppression of women is not preached in mainstream Islam.

Maybe another clarification is in order. I would basically consider anyone who follows any superstition as lunatic. If folks ran around praying to Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny, Thor, Baal, and all the others I don't think anyone would object to the term. But it is just as easy for atheist to fall into the habit of accepting what millions do as acceptable. Kind of like the difference between a cult and a religion...the difference is just the number of practitioners/believers. Who here would not think that the followers of Jim Jones were not lunatics? But multiply the number of followers by an exponential and viola ...NOT LUNATICS.

I think that the assertion that even tacit/token followers of a superstition are facilitators and lend some semblance of credibility to the homicidal nut jobs. After all, the 19 guys who flew the planes on 9/11 were supported by very "normal" folks around the world. Even after the attack they continued to support Bin Laden and other terrorist groups around the world through charitable organizations. This is true of the Christians with groups like the IRA, Nazis, Aryan Nations and so forth.

So if you don't think Christians and Hindus, et cetera. are exempt from my accusation of lunacy you would be wrong. Maybe it is selective lunacy...but lunacy none the less. Maybe delusional might be a better word but Dawkins has a copyright I think. ;-)

People can disagree with me and I will respect them but when people give excuses for Islam by claiming "it is not Islam" and to "not take the text seriously"; and by resorting to call things "Islamophobic" simply because you disagree with it and then rant about how "Capitalism is some sort of religion" and that the "U.K. is not a secular state" then I cite you as exactly one of those gullible, naive individuals which I put forth in my premise. I urge anyone to read your circular reasoning; you urge atheists not to read and understand religious text by ignoring the fact that is exactly what Muslims base their lives on. Again, I don't have to say anything for it to have been demonstrated in that you clearly exhibit those characteristics I mentioned; you did so all by yourself.